Daily Yellowstone journal., 1887-07-23
Saturday, July a3, 1887.
LAW vs.. JUSTICE.


Jefferson county has a murder case,
that of Hart who killed Pitts at Boulder
about a year ago, that is costing the
county lots Of money, and apparently
without result. The murder was q
of the most brutal and premeditated
crimes ever committed In Montana,
and merited the immediate action OF
Judge Lynch, but wiser counsels pre-
vailed and the murder came to trial
first before Judge Wade, when a hung
jury averted the fate that was richly
due him. Later he had another trial
before Chief Justice Mcconnell, at
which he was convicted and SEN
fenced to be hung yesterday. His
lawyer at once brought an appeal be-
fore the supreme court, and that body
on Tuesday last set aside the verdict
Of guilty on the purely technical, and
in the premises, fiimsy ground that
the court should have permitted the
defendant to inquire Of the individual
members Of the grand jury, on a me.
ton made to vacate and set aside the
indictment, whether or not twelve of
their number had voted for the find
ing of the verdict, rs required by law,
which means q new trial and largely
increased expense to Jefferson county,
even il another conviction Is had, and
II not, then the turning loose of as
red-handed an outlaw as ever dis
graced Montana. While it was un-
d~oubtedly the prisoners right to have
this point considered In his favor, else
three of our judges would moi have
concurred. IL is hard for tho ordinary
citizen to understand why 1t should
be allowed TO interfere with the exc.
cution of Justice. Though Hart may
have been illegally indicted to the ex-
tent raised by the appeal, and which
IL SCENE 10 purely technical, he Ger
tainly was legally tried and convicted.
So uncomfortable an omission In
In the initial proceedings should not
and does not in common sense affect
the legality and fairness Of the trial
which resulted In his conviction. RI.
ferring to the case the Helena Herald
says: 1T Is with extreme regret that
We learn of the decision Of our
supreme court setting aside the con-
viction Of Hart, the murderer of Pitts.
W. raise no question with the judges
who have joined In the decision. They
kavs beyond doubt done only that
which they believed an honest dis
charge Of official duty required. We
look simply at the case In Its general,
popular aspects and effects. The finer
points that cut such q prominent tig-
ure before the courts are not such as
impress the popular mind. People
reason In this way: Here Is adearly
convicted murderer, guilty beyond all
question of q wanton, malicious, das-
tardly crime. II any one ever de-
served hanging he does. III either the
law IL unable Or unwilling to do this
duty, what is the use OF having laws
and courts and juries and all this ex.
pense simply to let people go unwhip-
ped of justice? We do not pretend to
say that this IL the right or wisest
way to regard such miscarriages OF
justice. Where we have honest and
competent judges, as we have reason
to think We have at present, we be-
lieve 1t Is every mans duty TO abide
stead lastly by the courts decision to
uphold the law. But the mass of PEG.
pie overlook the steps by which legal
results are reached, and only look at
the naked fact that guilty men by
some hook or legal crook escape
Justice. And In this country they
are always inclined to take into
their own hands the iDfictiop Of
punishment that the courts have
failed to inflict. They do not think
Of all the consequences of such lawless-
ness, which undoubtedly are gener-
ally demoralizing when there Is any.
thing like settled society and q due
administration of law. Now we hope
there will he no outbreak of vengeance
in this case. The miserable murderer
suffers more every hour that he
lives than he could In the few minutes
that Il would take to hang him. Three
judges would not certainly have con
cured In this reversal Of judgment,
but for some good substantial grounds.
IL will be a mistake 10 take the case
out of the hands Of the law, as justice
will suffer rather than be served.